My opinion on assisted suicide is concise: If someone is suffering and they want to die, let them. There is a certain point where the suffering and hopelessness is too much to ask, and if the person expresses that they are ready to go, we should have ways to provide that service to them safely and legally. In California, we currently do not have a method to help someone end their life legally, and it leads certain doctors to circumvent the law to provide the service in other ways. My Great-Grandma was given a fatal dose of morphine to end her painful battle with cancer. It was a family decision, and it is not one that we regret. Of course we were devestated to see her go, but we firmly believe it was in her best interest. The nurse who helped us endangered her career, and I do not think she should have had to take a risk to help my Great-Grandma end her pain.
Kevorkian was doing the right thing in the wrong way. His video of him killing the man actively was a demonstation of an overinflated ego that was detrimental to the cause he was trying to promote. He chose to represent himself in court - another egotistical move. Kevorkian did this more for himself than for his patients, and I'm not entirely sure the whole thing wasn't just some publicity stunt. Yet, it takes someone with guts (an ego) like his to come clean about what he was doing in the first place. Unfortunately, he will always be the face of euthanasia and I think that will make it more difficult to legalize.
As for the religious groups who hate the idea of euthanasia, it is not their place. Suicide would be a personal decision, not one of the church. The Cardinal whose article we read in class is following what he believes to be God's will, but he neglects the fact that his God may not be everyones' God but the law is everyones' law and, thus, we should not base our laws on religion. Seperation of church and state, etc. etc., their opinions are hardly valid when concerning this debate. Disability advocates are more qualified to voice their opinions on the subject, but they also must recognize that every individual situation is different and even they cannot understand that trauma that the person is going through. Disability advocates should feel grateful that they have the mental stability to deal with their disabilities, try to encourage people that life is still worth living, and then be willing to back off and let people go if nothing works. No two lives are the same, and assuming that they understand exactly what another disabled person is going through just because they are disabled is a vast generalization and it is terribly incorrect. Offer advice, then leave.
Both sides of the issue have good points. They just choose to demonstrate them inappropriately.
The best way to decide what our law should be in the United States is to look to other countries who have legalized Euthanasia. Switzerland and the Netherlands have both legalized assisted suicide. I see no "slippery slope" occuring in those countries as of yet, and it would be interesting to see what disability advocates and regular citizens think about the legalization. After analyzing their opinions and the effects of the law, we could make an informed decision and modify the other country's law to fit our country.
My hope is that assisted suicide will be legalized in the near future with a set of requirements, such as a time limit from time of accident to time of suicide and a mental assessment program that could try to make them feel more optomistic (without making them feel like therapy patients. "How does this make you feel," garbage won't help them to feel better). I believe that people should be able to make their own choices, but I also believe that a small fit of depression could be enough to send people to the suicide clinic. There is medication for depression and it would be incredibly unfortunate to have someone end their life when they are only temporarily depressed, so if we do legalize euthanasia, it needs to be strictly regulated to avoid accidents.
Kevorkian was doing the right thing in the wrong way. His video of him killing the man actively was a demonstation of an overinflated ego that was detrimental to the cause he was trying to promote. He chose to represent himself in court - another egotistical move. Kevorkian did this more for himself than for his patients, and I'm not entirely sure the whole thing wasn't just some publicity stunt. Yet, it takes someone with guts (an ego) like his to come clean about what he was doing in the first place. Unfortunately, he will always be the face of euthanasia and I think that will make it more difficult to legalize.
As for the religious groups who hate the idea of euthanasia, it is not their place. Suicide would be a personal decision, not one of the church. The Cardinal whose article we read in class is following what he believes to be God's will, but he neglects the fact that his God may not be everyones' God but the law is everyones' law and, thus, we should not base our laws on religion. Seperation of church and state, etc. etc., their opinions are hardly valid when concerning this debate. Disability advocates are more qualified to voice their opinions on the subject, but they also must recognize that every individual situation is different and even they cannot understand that trauma that the person is going through. Disability advocates should feel grateful that they have the mental stability to deal with their disabilities, try to encourage people that life is still worth living, and then be willing to back off and let people go if nothing works. No two lives are the same, and assuming that they understand exactly what another disabled person is going through just because they are disabled is a vast generalization and it is terribly incorrect. Offer advice, then leave.
Both sides of the issue have good points. They just choose to demonstrate them inappropriately.
The best way to decide what our law should be in the United States is to look to other countries who have legalized Euthanasia. Switzerland and the Netherlands have both legalized assisted suicide. I see no "slippery slope" occuring in those countries as of yet, and it would be interesting to see what disability advocates and regular citizens think about the legalization. After analyzing their opinions and the effects of the law, we could make an informed decision and modify the other country's law to fit our country.
My hope is that assisted suicide will be legalized in the near future with a set of requirements, such as a time limit from time of accident to time of suicide and a mental assessment program that could try to make them feel more optomistic (without making them feel like therapy patients. "How does this make you feel," garbage won't help them to feel better). I believe that people should be able to make their own choices, but I also believe that a small fit of depression could be enough to send people to the suicide clinic. There is medication for depression and it would be incredibly unfortunate to have someone end their life when they are only temporarily depressed, so if we do legalize euthanasia, it needs to be strictly regulated to avoid accidents.